Talk:The Association
Compliments: This looks nice. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Gratitude: Thank you, I feel like it is starting to come together, even though I didn't add any new content. Finally got around to adding the Legislative branch, the Association now seems to have a system of government. Witty Reply: Now we just need political parties… so that that government grinds to a halt. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Blantantly Ignoring Political Parties Comment: Looking at the map and considering the size of the Association. I am struggling with scaling it in my mind, I am sure that you have a better grasp. #How far, on average, can an individual on horse back travel in a day; assuming they don't want to kill their horse. #How far apart are the Major Baronies? My basic thought is that the Minor Baronies will be about a days travel away from the Major Baronies and from eachother. Hours of my life, that I will never get back, dedicated to your question: Horses travel at about the same rate as Humans. Their walking speeds aren't really all that much faster, but they take longer and more frequent breaks. Mounted or dismounted, travel would be about 30 miles a day for much of the Western Territories. In more rugged terrain, or if someone wasn't in a hurry, this would be a shorter distance. I speak from experience when I say that this is not a simple hike, especially carrying more than just what's in your pockets; that's a pace that will wear anyone out at the end of the day. The size of a barony will vary considerably. It's not just the difference between our major and minor ones, but historically there was a huge spread of possible sizes. That issue is further complicated by English laws that prevented nobles from owning contiguous territories. The French used a rule of thumb for post-Revolution department sizes that would work here; they were supposed to be no larger than a person could cross in a day. The contemporary English county of Westmoreland was pieced together from the baronies of Kendal and Westmoreland we can use these for our size comparisons. At 485,990 acres (in 1831) that makes the component baronies averaging 380 square miles each. A 30 mile hex (one day's travel) is about 300 square miles, so we're in the same general range with those. If we accept as a given that baronies (both sorts) will average out to one day's travel across, or 30 miles, and with the guideline you provided that the baronies have one day's travel of open space between their borders, I generated the graphic to the right. Much of the Association would be open space, but that rather fits the imagery. Each major barony would then be a minimum of four days ride from one another. None of this is actually taking the map of the Association into account, by the way. The major baronies would likely be much farther apart than four days. If the major baronies mark our cities (a fair assumption) then they would need to be about an order of magnitude larger than the minor ones. There is quite a bit of wiggle room with baronial sizes, especially contrasting the majors and minors. Population size (which is an entirely different conundrum) can be adjusted within what we've found here. Nothing says density has to be uniform, and our setup with major baronies implies (especially if there's any appreciable populace size) that they are somewhat urban in character. … (This is the sort of crap that I go through everytime someone asks what seems like a simple and reasonable question like, "How much does that wagon cost?") ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Wow, I did not mean to make you do all of that: Above and beyond my friend. The numbers based on my write up of the Association is 11 Major Baronies and 56 Minor Baronies. I am assuming that the majority of the Minor Baronies are established along the interconnecting roadways that I have not yet described here. (They existed in an early version of the Association from websites of days of old.) There are also an untold number of small towns and villages that are spread throughout the Association. I guess I need a scaled map with a hex-grid to overlay on the existing map of the Association. You have no idea, that was just the beginning: If I was to increase the size of the above hex graphic, it would show that there aren't really that many more minor baronies than major. In the actual setting however, this is not the case. As I understand things, the minor baronies fall into that category for two reasons. One is that their size; they just aren't as big as the majors, though exceptions may be found. The other is that they do not belong to the the formal political alliance, either by their choice, or the decision of the other baronies in the Association. This is a self-perpetuating cycle, as the collective power of the Association helps keep their members' sizes larger than their neighbours, and only the larger baronies are allowed to join. I can certainly imagine each major barony has a collection of satellite baronies, either in a ring around it, or allied but found anywhere in the Western Territories. This would be in addition to any number of separate towns and villages, and unaligned minor baronies, perhaps with their own alliances, albeit of lesser political power. I freely admit that I am looking at this from a broad and foreign viewpoint. For someone from, say, Formour or Byzant, the Association is a single nation-state. From someone living in Wesson, for example, the Association is one of many such alliances (the 600 pound gorilla, admittedly) but the North Shore Baronies nor the Pike's Range Townships shouldn't be totally dismissed. Their political pull may not be on quite the same level, but is still important locally, especially if they combine their influence. Fortunately for Wesson, the Northies and Pikers haven't seen eye to eye since Old Man Roosevelt's horse herd mysteriously vanished back in the summer of '56. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Minor means smallish: The Minor Baronies are part of the Association and the Framework that has created it, they even have a roll in the Congress. They have a voice in the creation of the laws and have the rights and power granted them in the Framework. The difference between the Major and Minor Baronies is size. The Baronies are cities, the Major Baronies have the largest populations and greatest military force, the High Baron's Barony is the Capital of the Association, and the Minor Baronies are noticeably smaller in population. It is likely that the Major Baronies have greater access to some natural resource allowing them to sustain larger populations. It is possible for new Baronies to be created and for Major & Minor Baronies to see their roles changed but for the purpose of world building this is the way things are now. Colt was the 12th Major Barony when the Assocaition was created, they have since broken away from the others, taking with them 4 minor baronies. Colt is located on the far western side of the Association, they are not included on the Associaiton map but I did add a pin on the for them. Within the Association, Colt is considered the Outlaw Barony because they seceded from the Association, they are not inheritently outlaws or even unlawful within their own "nation". More of the story of Colt is to come, I haven't had time to write it yet. The Assocaition is also effectively a Free Trade Zone amongst Baronies, the Framework allows for the High Baron to regulate international commerce as part of the Administrative duties. This does not mean that the Baronies will always be in agreement but hopefully the Framework will prevent them from outright civil war. This does not prevent Baronies from working closely together or even against one another. The Major Baronies are also financially responsible for the roads that connect the Major Baronies together. They are required to maintain them and to "police" them in order to protect interbarony trade. I had created a map of these major road ways but lost it in the death of the last website. I need to recreate it now. Framework note: No one Baron or Baronness may rule, directly, more than one Barony. Though it is possible for one family to rule more than one Barony. Religion: I don't know if we've discussed this at length: what religious faiths are practised in the Association? On an unrelated point (except in a broad culture-building sense) what sorts of names are there in the Association? ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || A Work in Progress: While I have spent time thinking about both of these questions I do not currently have a definitive answer. At some point I would like to have the aforementioned conversation at length. I think it will help me coalesce the conflicting concepts that are banging around in my head. Cowboys & Indians The underlying theme of the Associations is and has always been the Cowboys are Indians. The langauge, culture, and religion of the Association is a blend of the "American Wild West" and Native American Cultures. The intention is to honor Native American Culture not ridicule it. I have made several attempts in the past to study Native American culture and religion in order to create these aspects in the Associaiton. Unfortunately it is a time consuming process that I have not been able to commit to recently. Eventually I will, I hope. Fun with numbers Zipf's Law applies to population sizes of cities. Specifically, the second largest city in a nation is half the size of the largest. The third most populous is a third the size of the greatest, and so forth. If we assume that each major barony is a city (here defined as having a population of ten-thousand or more) with no other cities in the Western Territories other than a major barony, then we can derive an approximate size of the largest city: 120,000. The approximate city sizes would then be: 1st-120,000, 2nd-60,000, 3rd-40,000, 4th-30,000, 5th-24,000, 6th-20,000, 7th-17,000, 8th-15,000, 9th-13,000, 10th-12,000, 11th-11,000, and 12th-10,000. For most of the work that I've been doing involving international trade, I have been assuming that cities are about ten-thousand or more. However, the actual metric that I've been using overall holds that cities can be as small as eight-thousand. That would change the numbers slightly, so that the largest city--and thus most populous barony--would be around 80,000 people. This all would give the Association a rather urban character, perhaps a bit too much so. If we instead assume that the 56 minor baronies are all towns--and there aren't any towns or cities that are not synonymous with a barony--then our numbers shift downward considerably. There would then only be about half a dozen cities in the Association. The largest city would then have a population of about 45,000. In terms of the overall population, this would change things from 36 million to three and a quarter million total people in the Association. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Rules & Laws be damned I always pictured the Major Baronies to be very close matched in size, I know that plays hell with your Zipf's Law but the Baronies developed as independent city-states coming to be "the Associaition" in more recent history. A specific date or age has not been noted. That is another, related, conversation. Though the numbers do not fit the Zipf's Law, I was thinking a mean popular of 100,000 for the Major Baronies with each being within 20,000 of the average, of the Major Baronies the largest Barony @120,000 and the smallest at @80,000. Another reason that the Major Baronies would remain close in size is that the Capital moves regularly, 10-20 years would be about all the time one Barony would be able to hold onto the High Baron seat. Considering the orgins of the Baronies, I would assume the Major Baronies and the Minor Baronies would hold true to the Zipf's Law. Each Major Baron has about 5 minor Baronies around it. There is also cities and towns that are within the association that are currently unaccounted for in my write-up. Assuming that each Major Barony has 10 smaller holdings, five of which are minor baronies, each region represented by a Major Baronies would encompass, with some serious rounding, 300,000 people. Thus the population of the Association would be closer to 3.3 Million people. If you think that these numbers are grossly inaccurate or that the suggested sizes pushes the Association outside of the "Wild West" feel that I intended please let me know. Your thoughts are always welcome on the subject. I had something here, but it seems to have been eaten by a grue Zipf's Law is related to the Pareto Principle. It applies to population sizes whenever people can migrate relatively freely. More uniform distribution is only found in purely mathematical models with completely evenly distributed resources and access. A quick glance at the map of the Association shows that there are broad differences in resources (fertile plains versus mountains) and access to resources (distance to the ocean, proximity to other civic centers). Unless people are strongly (if not violently) prohibited from movement, then some cities will naturally accumulate more people than others. Without forced migration into less populous (but still major) baronies, coupled with strong barriers to travel, it's unlikely that the population centers would be so homogeneous in size. City size is not necessarily the same as importance. For example, China has 20 cities that are the same size as New York or larger... much, much larger. However, only two--Shanghai and Beijing--even come anywhere close to the importance and influence of New York City, and even that's debatable. Having so many large metropolises in close proximity to one another does wonky things to population density. Each major barony would indeed have around 10 satellite cities with populations greater than 10,000 (and a dozen of these for Grey). Each of these in turn have towns surrounding them with populations still in the four-digit range. This gives us 120 cities, 1200 other urban centers, and a total population of ((10x100,000)+120,000)+(120x10,000)+(1200x1000)=a total urban population of 3,520,000. Since it takes about ten people growing food in a rural area to support one city-dweller, we get a total population of 38,720,000 people in the Association. This does not cover all of the Western Territories--unaligned baronies, Colt, fringe communities, pastoral herders following a transhumance lifestyle, et cetera--just the Association itself. The Association has an approximate area of 530,000 square miles. This puts its size between that of Peru and Mongolia. Coincidentally, these are fairly close in climate and geography, especially Peru, with Mongolia being notably larger, higher, and colder. As of the last census Peru only had a population of 28 million, and Mongolia is estimated to only house about three million. The resulting population density is still fairly reasonable given Midian's technology level (France and Germany in 1400 were higher) but it's still a rather urbanised country that results. Another point to consider is that the larger the population, the more people each gunslinger has to watch out for. Back when we used the historic demographics of 1850s Texas to determine the number of gunslingers, we only got 384 total. That's more than a hundred-thousand people per gunslinger. I'm just saying, that's a lot of really big cities, pretty close to one another. These might not be terribly big cities from a modern perspective, but that still makes each and every major barony larger than London or most of the great Italian city-states in the Renaissance. Given average urban population densities, 61 per acre, by the way, Grey would cover exactly 2000 acres. Ms. IX is right, I do sometimes make things more complicated than they need to be. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || Error! I think that I understand the error in our disconnect. I believe that it is occuring in the way in which we are defining the population of the Baronies. Your are accounting for the city-dwelling population within a given barony and in my accounting I am including the Urban, Suburban, & Rural population of a given Barony's area or region of control. I am sure that we can work out a set of numbers, though we might have to get together in order to do so. So let us re-math this: Let us assume that the Major Baronies are all cities of at least 10,000 and the minor Baronies are all towns with populations less that 10,000. Let us further assume in our calculations that Colt, before they broke away, was the largest single Barony. This way that can stand on their own after breaking away and gives us reason to believe that the Association could not force them to stay in line. Assuming: Major Barony = City of at least 10,000 Minor Barony = Town of at least 1,000 but less than 10,000 12 Major Baronies (Colt still factored in) If this is "true" than the Association should have approximately 108 Minor Baronies, and calculating for only urban population the Association would have 644,215 people. Based on the simple 10 to 1 rule you noted above the rural population is 6,442,150 or a total population of 7,086,365. How does that sound? Now I will need to look back over the Association and see what ramifications there are if I need to have approximately 108 minor baronies. To save some heartache I will like assume that 8 or 9 of those minor baronies broke away with Colt. This would produce a population of less that 15 people per square mile, about 13.4. "Math class is hard." ----Barbie While I've been focusing on cities as part of my recent global mapping efforts, I haven't discounted rural populations at all. Cities not only have smaller satellite communities, but these in turn have their own, all the way down to small villages in the hinterlands. Somebody has to grow the food to feed our urban dwellers. In fact, it is the density of these smaller villages, and the size of the surrounding countryside, that I have been using to determine city sizes. While I can get very precise as far as land area and how I'm crunching the density data, determining that population density value in the first place is a bit of a challenge. Admittedly, it's mostly a matter of taking historic values for similar peoples--based on their culture, geography, climate, technology, and how long that they have lived in that area--and trying to find a 'feels right' value by way of comparison. So, when presented with alternative data sources--such as assuming that each barony has a 10,000+ population center at its core, or the explicitly stated census of Zar at 510,000--I try to use those figures instead to arrive at something that keeps things consistent and retains internal logic. That said, since there are strong correspondences between data points, we can find any number, if we are given sufficient others. The Association (discounting Colt) covers some 505,538 square miles. I'm basing the size of the total Association off of the modified map you made some time ago, and overlaying it on my new global map (where I just have to count pixels to find area. With a population density of 13.4 (which is pretty low, by the way) get a population of only 2,109,160. That results in only three cities. Using your earlier figure of 7,086,365 for the total population, this is still only six cities with populations greater that 10k+. In order to generate a dozen cities with populations above 10,000, we need an average population density of 147 per square mile (with a total population of 23 million). Again, we need enough farmers to grow food for people living in the cities. This is certainly doable, and it is about the density of Italy or France during the Renaissance. Incidentally, the largest city generated has about 120,000 people living there, so go you. You were totally spot-on with that one. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || WTF... How big and how many people? 505,538 x 13.4 = 6,774,209 In my calculations I was trying to work within the system I designed, accounting for Colt as part of the associaiton for population & size. A population density of 15 people per square mile is very low based on the numbers that I am seeing in your world building efforts, it would also be low compared to historical data. Assuming the 530,000 square miles that you stated earlier includes Colt that creates a population of 7,950,000 people. Using the Zipf's Law that you stated above and the basic perimeter of 10,000 poeple equal a Major Barony I calculated that the larget Barony would be 120,000 people. Continue to math out the minor baronies, less than 10,000 but at least 1,000 people, produced 108 minor baronies. The total urban population of the Major & minor Baronies would then be 644,215. Assuming the 10 to 1 ratio that you mentioned earlier the Associaition would need to have a rural population 6,442,150. This would give a total population of 7,086,365 people. It seems like we are going to have to sit down together to work this out because I do not see an error in my mathematics. Urban: Major Barony (cities): 10,000 plus people Minor Barony (town): 1,000 plus people Rural: VIllage: Less than 1,000 people Where did we leave off? I am trying to look back through the work and decide where we left off. I feel like we spoke about this in person and came to some resolution but damned if I made any notes about it. Titles are important... As the Association grows in scope and detail, I have to consider if I should change some titles. Would it make things more clear or more confusing to add more titles within the Association? I started the assocaition with the term Baron as the highest title save High-Baron, but I am now reconsidering. The reason for this is simple. As I have added more details I have realized that I need more titles. I am obviously pulling ideas from a few specific sources and hereitary titles from Europe are common enough that individuals can grasp there meaning. Current consideration: Major Baronary becomes Duchy Minor Barony becomes County High-Baron = Archduke/Archduchess Baron General = Duke/Duchess Minor Baron = Count/Countess (Could be subdivided by adding Viscount) Baronet (Member of the House of Lords) = Baron/Baroness Esquire (Member of the House of Commons) = Baronet/Baronetess To name a thing is to have power over it While the Association isn't exactly adjacent to the Byzant Empire (Suditerre is really, really big) it's proximity (and Byzant's power) make it reasonable to assume that some cultural elements will still rub off on our firearms enthusiasts. That is, having lots of big, important sounding, titles is well within the bounds of plausibility. Converting Minor Baronies into counties implies that these are subdivisions of the Major Baronies/duchies. I know that this isn't how the historical model worked, but most modern readers/players will interpret 'counties' as 'subdivisions of a state'. That's fine if this is what you are doing with your changes, but can cause some confusion of counties and duchies are supposed to be separate polities rather than duchies being comprised of multiple counties. Another consideration is that terms can carry emotional baggage with them. On its own 'baron' has enough uses (such as with 'oil baron' or 'robber baron') as to be rather neutral for game purposes. However, combined with other feudal terms the connotation becomes that the Association has a strong Medieval European cultural influence (English, in particular) which isn't something I believe you want for the Association. It may just be my personal bias, but I rather prefer the idea of the Association taking its cues more from the Plains Indians of the 19C and Five Civilised Tribes, rather than them just basically being Formourians with suntans and pistols. Sorry, that sounded harsh. I just want the Association to have its own cool identity. That said, your proposed divisions are sound on their own. That is, you have dukes in charge of a duchy and counts in charge of counties, rather than the admittedly more abstruse Formourian model. I'll reproduce it here so you'll know what I mean: It may be worth noting that Formour does use nested polities as its structural model. That is, baronies are within a shire, shires are within parishes, et cetera. ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || || The Path less traveled Thank you, I do want the Association to have a unique feel and culture to it and the change in titles would bring it much closer to the models being used in other parts of Midian. Time to do a little more research and find other alternatives that I can use. For now the curremt system stands until I can think of or find something a little better suited. Ideas and concepts are still welcome. Bombast One idea for titles is to have separate ones for each baron (or other rank) that are unique to that particular office. You, or a Game Master, can get creative with these titles as desired. For example, a minor baron outside of Schaefer might style himself Chief Lawgiver of Heckler Mountain & Koch Valley and Keeper of Our Great Traditions, whereas his more humble neighbour to the east might instead call himself Elder Phillip. The term 'baron' would still be used in the generic, and many barons (perhaps all of the major ones) could style themselves as such. In fact, if all of the big guns just use the title of baron, that might keep the minor lords from going too crazy with their titles. Some might try to inflate their perceived power with more impressive sounding titles (perhaps some Bizzannite influence there) while others figure that sticking with the style shared by the stronger lords is the better option, cashing in on the cachet of that title. Some of these alternate titles might have a very long tradition of use--older than the Association by far--and some could be self-chosen by the current baron himself. In any case, it wouldn't be impolite to refer to the ruler as such, and everybody would know who you mean when you just use that term. For example, a gunslinger passing through the area might say, "Tell your baron to bring men to help us clear this blocked pass," without having someone reply, "Um, actually, he's called the Grand High Poobah." ::::::::::: ————Golgotha—Kinslayer— ☠ || || || ||